battlefieldfandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:Nayhem
Welcome Hi, welcome to Battlefield Series Wiki! Thanks for your edit to the Cerbere Landing page. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! -- Bondpedia (Talk) 11:18, December 14, 2009 Category work Attempting to clean up the flow of categories. Let me know if I've broken something.Nayhem 01:12, September 7, 2011 (UTC) :While your intentions are good, I'm afraid you might want to familiarize yourself with the categories section of our manual of style, which outlines the preferred style for categories. In particular you will realize that categories such as Category:Vehicles should not be removed from relevant articles. Your reformatting of Category:Battlefield 2 vehicles to Category:Vehicles of Battlefield 2 is, however, very helpful - 13:53, September 7, 2011 (UTC) ::If you want a task to do, perhaps you could recategorize everything in Category:Weapons of Battlefield into Category:Weapons? - 14:25, September 7, 2011 (UTC) :::Sorry about the trouble. And yes, I was considering looking over weapons next. Thanks for the heads up. - Nayhem 23:01, September 7, 2011 (UTC) :::Personally, the use of an overarching 'Categories' category seems wasteful. The and pages already serve this function. I also believe it would be much better to list only terminal categories, and to list them before game categories, since certain weapons and equipment may be used in a later game, and the no-edit category section on every page favors adding to the end. - Nayhem 06:18, September 8, 2011 (UTC) ... You should just use AutoWikiBrowser, it'll take a lot less time to substitute categories that way. Йура15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 23:34, September 7, 2011 (UTC) :As soon as I find out how to get permission to use here (and how the tool itself works)… - Nayhem 23:59, September 7, 2011 (UTC) Quality A veteran of this wiki i presume? no wonder why you edit so good. you might see a nomination if you keep up this work Zephalian 08:27, September 8, 2011 (UTC) P.S im not an admin :Actually, no. It's been a while since I first found the site. Just recently I decided to take some free time to fix what needs it. I have been editing Wikipedia for a lot longer, and some other Wikia projects, but quite irregularly. I do like organizing things, and that AWB tool is pretty useful, too. - Nayhem 08:31, September 8, 2011 (UTC) :Cool, the wikipedia has so many open choices, that i cannot possibly keep up, and by the way you show the aspects of an admin and your alot like the previous UOTM. Zephalian 08:32, September 8, 2011 (UTC) RE:Categories Nah, you're doing some great work, but categories are a wierd thing. Basically, what we do with categories is we try to keep them simple. If we make categories simple, such as having just a basic Weapons of Battlefield 2 category, we don't need to make an Assault Rifles of Battlefield 2 category for weapons like the M16 and the L85, as we can put that information in templates and in the page itself. Hence the reason for reverting the Expansion Maps of BF2 back to Maps of BF2. But, some great work with the new pages. - 12:59, September 10, 2011 (UTC) :It has to be said, going through categorizing things is, I think, soooooooooo tedious. Well done for getting on and doing it - 13:06, September 10, 2011 (UTC) ::I don't mind it at all. If it helps people find related pages, then its purpose is served. Going back to the Maps of BF2 example, it seemed that the two existing categories were designed for 'original' maps and expansions, though it could also have been two different mindsets choosing their own categories and failing to see what was already there. I thought that all of the changes I made were being reverted. ::I don't think categories need to get more complicated than a tree of in-game items or features, and a secondary classing by game titles—kind of a two-dimensional system. It would make it easier for new articles to simply belong to one item/feature category and to as many game categories as necessary, with templates bridging any other gaps. Thanks for your input. - Nayhem 03:58, September 11, 2011 (UTC) Re: Yes, they can be recovered. However, the work seemed rather redundant because firstly, most of the article was nothing more than listing IFVs in different games(which is why we have categories), and secondly a lot of the information is already covered on the pages of the individual vehicles; there is also the risk that "comparing" vehicles will lead to subjective interpretation rather than factual (ie somebody writing "LAV-AD is superior to the 9K922 Tunguska because it can be seaborne"). Йура15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 17:50, May 14, 2012 (UTC) :Not having played other games in the series, I was hoping to leave it up to other editors, rather than do third-hand research of my own. As for comparisons, there are plenty of valid ones to be made between the types. And even though your Tunguska example can only really be observed by PC players on one map, the fact that one is amphibious is still a valid point. I suppose what I'm really complaining about is that there was no discussion on whether the article was useful, just outright deletion.Nayhem 00:21, May 16, 2012 (UTC) Re: I Protected the page.-- Slopijoe<3 You bro 10:04, September 19, 2012 (UTC) Hi Could you assist me in writing articles for BF3 classes please as you have better at writing articles then me at it.-- Slopijoe<3 You bro 13:27, September 22, 2012 (UTC) :If such is needed. Just keep in mind I've only had first hand experience with 2142, BF3, and Heroes. Nayhem (talk) 23:50, September 22, 2012 (UTC) Forum Issues There's pretty much nothing wrong on my end. Try going to the forums again, and see what happens. Rangers Lead 23:23, March 20, 2013 (UTC) :Not happening anymore, whatever it was. Nayhem (talk) 06:01, March 22, 2013 (UTC) Hey Could I get a source for this? Юра15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 05:57, June 12, 2013 (UTC) :Done. Didn't show up in the Commander trailer, like someone else said. Nayhem (talk) 06:13, June 12, 2013 (UTC) ::Thanks. Юра15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 06:17, June 12, 2013 (UTC) Favor The XM25 is not a gadget, but it is in the category - Weapons of Battlefield 4. Since you did it could you replace it with the right category? I tried but my browser wont delete it when i press the trash can icon next to the wrong categories while in edit mode. Much appreciated -- awyman13 {Talk}' { }' 08:47, June 13, 2013 (UTC) :I'm torn. In game, it occupies a gadget slot, but is obviously a weapon like the M320 and M26. I suppose the safe route is to class it as both. I used the edit controls at page bottom; have you tried the actual edit page itself? Nayhem (talk) 09:01, June 13, 2013 (UTC) Yes ive tried the page. Also on the Shank page you made. Its only different from the Knife in look so it wasnt really necessary so i combined the info into the Knife page and redirected your original page to that. -- awyman13 {Talk}' { }' 09:09, June 13, 2013 (UTC) Re: There's been a verbal understanding for a while that tactics aren't supposed to be around. Or rather, that subjectivity isn't supposed to be around. I'm sorry if you personally liked those pages, but we don't stand for subjectiveness on this site. Юра15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 02:30, June 17, 2013 (UTC) :Unplanned gameplay versus arcane standards? I suppose what you're trying to say is that these things belong in a blog or something. Nayhem (talk) 02:58, June 17, 2013 (UTC) ::Basically, yes. Юра15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 03:04, June 17, 2013 (UTC) ::::We don't put information that can vary from user to user here, such as "this gun is the best gun in Battlefield 8645." That can be disputed and cause un-needed arguements and flamewars on the wiki. We need professional, quality stuff like "The AR17346A57 is an assault rifle featured in Battlefield 8645: Martian Attack DLC. It is unlocked by completing the "Thisistotallyfakebutcouldbeanactualgun" assignment where you edit 10 million articles on the Battlefield Wiki. It does 50 damage per shot at any range and fires at 68475 Rounds per minute." 03:09, June 17, 2013 (UTC) Many other Wikias like the COD Wiki also had tactics for many pages and removed them for the same reason above and believe me that Wikia was BIG on tactics. -- awyman13 {Talk}' { }' 03:11, June 17, 2013 (UTC) :On an unrelated note, I remember being one of the foremost proponents of removing tactics on the CoD wiki back when I was an editor there. Юра15px|link=User talk:YuriKaslov 03:14, June 17, 2013 (UTC) ::I wasn't a big player in that Yuri but I do remember that. 03:17, June 17, 2013 (UTC) :::Anywho the case is simple, tactic pages are simply put: greater excuses to subjective info. To me opinionated stuff like: TEH M16A3 is so OP it makes other guns invalid. I would rather not do so. If it was, me and yuri would be playing edit wars with the vehicles.-- Slopijoeheil dir im siegerkranz 03:20, June 17, 2013 (UTC) :::Or tywin, two fanboys who have 100 service stars on 1 weapon each could have a flame war on the weapon pages saying like "No the AR17346A57 sucks the M18347A85 is so much better and AR17346A57Fanboy sucks the balls of the M18367A85 and he knows it" 03:22, June 17, 2013 (UTC) The way I went about these was more along the lines of "these are things that players might do". So if someone had a question like "wtf is roofing?" or "how is that jeep flying through the air?", there was an article to answer that. None of these articles were about "this is better than that", which I remove often enough from weapon or map articles. Maybe they shouldn't have been called "tactics", which seems to evoke opinions rather than a sense of "you can try this". Nayhem (talk) 07:20, June 17, 2013 (UTC) Trusted User How would you feel on being a Trusted User here at the BF Wikia? Youve made tons of great edits in the past 4 Years! I'll ask a B-Crat if you agree but it not a sure thing (though im confident). Until then, keep up the editing! -- '' awyman13'' Talk' ' 22:45, August 22, 2013 (UTC) :I would certainly appreciate it. Thanks for considering it! Nayhem (talk) 23:07, August 22, 2013 (UTC) Question Theres a thing I noticed about you, your good at writing in guide format, thats a person I need ATM. Someone as your talent shouldnt be wasted. Im trying to figure out how I can rewrite some of the Gun Articles for BF3 similiar to this. So far your the only one with natural talent for this. Is it possible you can write it similiar to the BF3 Saiga 12K for MP during your free time? If you can, great. If not well I can attempt to ask an other person (I'll guarentee that your edits dont get reverted or any hard work is trashed).-- The Imperial Fleet Serving the empire since since 1708 06:51, August 25, 2013 (UTC) : Thanks for noticing. I had a bit of experience writing for GameFAQs back in the day. What page(s) are you asking to be rewritten? Personally, I think the BF3 MP section on the Saiga page has too many suggestions and opinions, and I hope you're asking how to make it more objective. I do recall some of my earlier writing not being up to standard. If you're asking about making walkthrough-style articles (which I suppose the Humble Bundle crowd could use at the moment), that can also be arranged. The M224 Mortar page was mostly my work—even now some parts stand out as being more prescriptive than descriptive. I'll probably clean some stuff up when I add BF4 information to it. In the mainspace articles, we should be telling readers how weapons and vehicles *can* and *might* be used, instead of how they *should* be used. Things I try to include are known facts (from Battlelog, Symthic or other reliable sources), its role in battle, strengths and weaknesses, and quirks that might not be readily apparent. We can leave opinions to the YouTube guys. Nayhem (talk) 05:48, August 26, 2013 (UTC) Write it in a way you feel comfortable, let me see it and I'll decide from there. The fact that you write guides makes it better. I agree with all of your sentences. Give me an example and I'll make sure your edits arnt "undone".-- The Imperial Fleet Serving the empire since since 1708 21:55, August 27, 2013 (UTC) ::It's a wiki. What edits can't be undone? Nayhem (talk) 02:56, August 30, 2013 (UTC) Image Licenses Hello! Some of your images need proper licensing. It looks like you got the templates down, and even provided some links in the summary, however, they need to be actually formatted into the template itself (specifically, the Fair Use). For example, take a look at the Fair Use template here. In source mode, the licensing looks like this: If you need assistance, let me know. Thanks! '' [[User:PLR Soldier|'PLR Soldier']][[user talk:PLR Soldier|'Talk']] '' 01:18, August 30, 2013 (UTC) :Damn good photos though :) -- '' awyman13'' Talk' ' 01:36, August 30, 2013 (UTC) ::Agreed! Only trying to make them better. ;) '' [[User:PLR Soldier|'PLR Soldier']][[user talk:PLR Soldier|'Talk']] '' 01:46, August 30, 2013 (UTC) :::Got it. Some are my screenshots. What do I need for the other three? Nayhem (talk) 02:56, August 30, 2013 (UTC) ::Like PLR said you need the "EA" and "Fair" templates put on those photo pages like he listed above. For the Fair use, put the hyperlink of the photos page in the center. That wiki link to the bf3 page is just an example. -- '' awyman13'' Talk' ' 02:59, August 30, 2013 (UTC) ::Also for the photos you took. They dont need the Fair Use template but EA still technically owns those pics so they still need the EA template. '' awyman13'' Talk' ' 03:00, August 30, 2013 (UTC) :::I'll learn to read someday. I thought the upload page would have plugged things in the right places. Nayhem (talk) 04:47, August 30, 2013 (UTC) ::::Looks like you got the hang of it. Good job. :) '' [[User:PLR Soldier|'PLR Soldier']][[user talk:PLR Soldier|'Talk']] '' 04:02, August 31, 2013 (UTC) Kloud Its ok Nayhem, thanks for your input over what happened on Klouds talk page. Lets just leave the guy alone for now. He may think we're ignorant but its actually him as he aparently takes everything as being hostile or a threat and being that hes new he doesnt know how the Wikia works. Dont worry about it man. -- '' awyman13'' Talk' ' 12:12, September 4, 2013 (UTC) Trusted User! '' [[User:PLR Soldier|'PLR Soldier']][[user talk:PLR Soldier|'Talk']] '' 02:45, September 5, 2013 (UTC) :Thanks! Nayhem (talk) 02:52, September 5, 2013 (UTC) . comment on this please Forum:Status of Tactic pages Changed -- The Imperial Fleet Serving the empire since since 1708 03:05, September 5, 2013 (UTC) 2142 EDITS Good job on reaching 2142 edits, keep up the good work! DiCePWNeD Recon| | 06:29, September 5, 2013 (UTC) : lol thanks! Almost missed it. Half of them might have been immediate re-edits, but I'll take what's there. Had to make sure to screenshot it before this made 2143. Nayhem (talk) 20:41, September 5, 2013 (UTC) Veteran Award :Thanks again! Nayhem (talk) 00:21, September 10, 2013 (UTC) Battlelog parsing As I'm currently stuck on x86 (32-bit), seems I'm on Battlelog duty for a moment. Bear with me if there are minor irritations. There are some inconsistencies with naming in certain places. For instance, the Vehicle stats show the "RCB", while the Dogtags show "RCB-90". I think we're giving the killfeed priority over any Battlelog stuff. Nayhem (talk) 08:59, October 1, 2013 (UTC) :Probably -- '' awyman13'' Talk' ' 16:58, October 1, 2013 (UTC) User of the Month! '' [[User:PLR Soldier|'PLR Soldier']][[user talk:PLR Soldier|'Talk']] '' 09:23, October 12, 2013 (UTC) :Thanks, guys! Nayhem (talk) 20:13, October 14, 2013 (UTC) Carbine problem Hi. There's a problem with the article on Carbine. Someone put an picture in the main description and speak about which carbine is the best, etc... I'm not sure but i think we don't need things like that. I tried to revert it but he made a lot of edit so a can't do it properly. : Whoever this was, you can select one of the older versions (Edit/History > click on timestamp) and just save that as the current version. — Nayhem (talk) 09:12, November 20, 2013 (UTC) Countdown to War Here is a link to the first 2 chapters of BF4: CTW. Think you could help? -- '' awyman13'' Talk' ' 13:44, November 18, 2013 (UTC) : I'm not much of a book reader, but I'll help where I can. — Nayhem (talk) 23:04, November 18, 2013 (UTC) Permission Hello. I would like to ask for permission to use a picture from the Battlefield Wiki. It is for a class project. DeeJay95 (talk) 20:35, November 21, 2013 (UTC) : In most cases, all of the images on this wiki have a license that permits use if you credit the original owner. Quite often, BF Wiki images are taken from other sources, such as the game, Wikipedia articles about real world topics, or other websites. Just check the image's "More info" page. For instance, the Type 98 article has this image of a tank, which happens to be in the public domain (you can use without restriction). In other words, follow the license and you'll be fine. If you need help with citations or such, we can help with those too. — Nayhem (talk) 04:22, November 22, 2013 (UTC) Portals Hi Nayhem Portals were my last pet-project before I left 3 years ago, but I never got chance to finish them. With the exception of adding new ones, they didn't seem to have gotten any more useful since then, so I decided to delete some and update the most important few. All the templates on the portals can be found on the game articles themselves (or should be, at least). This struck me as making them surplus to requirements. Nevertheless, if you still want them restoring I will do... - 14:26, December 5, 2013 (UTC) Phantom Prospect Did you notice the new Phantom Prospect Assignment? 04:17, December 7, 2013 (UTC) :Not familiar with it, nor have I seen it in Battlelog, but GameFAQs says it's something to do with the Engineer AA weapons. — Nayhem (talk) 10:51, December 7, 2013 (UTC) :JackFrags has a nice video detailing the assignment. It is heavily reliant on easter eggs, and has nothing to do with AA weapons. — Nayhem (talk) 03:27, December 11, 2013 (UTC) Hey Can you combine Gunner Incendiary with Proximity Defense? Besides the name, they have the same function correct? -- 22:51, January 1, 2014 (UTC) : They might have the same purpose, but they don't function quite the same. Prox defense is a countermeasure with total coverage, while Gunner Incendiary is just like throwing the M34 near your vehicle. GI is also a secondary weapon. Nayhem (talk) 23:11, January 1, 2014 (UTC) :Well it would depend on how similar they are. I combined many BC2 Specializations with those from BF3 and BF4 as they had the same or similar function. For instance i combined the Quick Reload Package Spec from BC2 with the Auto Loader Spec from 3 & 4. -- 23:22, January 1, 2014 (UTC) Favor Can you fix the MEC pages? Genius decided to rename them all to Middle Eastern Coalition spelled out. Gotta go to work so i cant do it atm. -- 03:35, June 19, 2016 (UTC) :Did some damage, but I'm not sure of how much you're seeing. Nayhem (talk) 07:44, June 19, 2016 (UTC) Re: Gas grenade If you think it'd help navigation, go for it, but overall this is part of the bigger issue that is appearance vs. functionality - which functionally identical but aesthetically different items get separate pages and which ones don't seem to be on a case-by-case basis, with no consistent style, either between games and the series as a whole. Ultimately I think this is a discussion worth having with the other wiki regulars at some time in the future, but for now, "whatever works" is the method of distinction. FluoxetinePatch (talk) 16:31, June 21, 2016 (UTC) :Was asking because the existing Gas Grenade redirect is preventing rename. I agree about the style issue, and feel I have likely wandered between goals myself. Nayhem (talk) 22:28, June 22, 2016 (UTC) smg page why did you undo my edit :Whoever this is, I'm not sure what you added, but there is already a Personal defense weapon page that has all of the SMGs/PDWs in BF3/4. If someone can confirm that Hardline also calls these PDWs, they should probably go there as well. No need to duplicate information. Please sign your talk posts. Nayhem (talk) 05:12, July 18, 2016 (UTC) BF1 Codex Can you take a look at Codex Entries page? I intend to add all Codex Entries as separate pages excluding those having to do with Weapons and Vehicles. -- 05:04, October 16, 2016 (UTC) : I won't be much help at the moment. Still sourcing from videos, no early access for myself. -- Nayhem (talk) 05:07, October 16, 2016 (UTC) :No worries but if you happen to come across any Codex in video feel free to add them. Game releases in 3 days so shouldnt have to wait too long. -- 05:10, October 16, 2016 (UTC) Adminship Hey man, what do you think about being an admin. I mean youve been here since 2009 and have done some fine work since then. -- 00:36, January 10, 2017 (UTC) :I would not mind at all, though I am not too familiar with what's involved. While I can't commit more time than the little I currently manage, I do promise not to break the site, and be spare with any powers. Nayhem (talk) 00:49, January 10, 2017 (UTC) Infobox design Hi, We don't know each other, but I noticed you made some edits to the weapon infobox lately. I would like to ask who is currently doing the design of infoboxes on this wiki. I would like to help out. Thanks in advance! [[:User:Ysbert|'ysbert']] �� �� 00:43, January 14, 2017 (UTC) :True, I do tweak the infoboxes every once in a while. As for who is actually responsible, the admins (mainly Awyman13) would know better than I, though I've been tinkering with some of the structure. If you're able to help, just tread carefully—there are likely as many redesigns as there have been games, so there's the risk of some older instances breaking if anything is removed. I'm running into this right now with the vehicle infobox (along with CSS that I don't have the patience rights to change). Nayhem (talk) 05:55, January 14, 2017 (UTC) :: I have been on this wiki for years, and a long time ago all infoboxes looked like Template:Infobox/Map as it looks now. I personally love that design: it's so nice and clear and perfectly fits the wiki. I was impressed and inspired by it. Then, many infoboxes were changed to what template:infobox/vehicle currently looks like: ugly, boring, and fat. I left a message somewhere here about how disappointed I was, but I was ignored. I have years and years of experience with templates, with normal wikitext and Lua. I have been designing several wikis like w:c:moderncombat and w:c:insurgency. Please check out the infoboxes on those wikis (w:c:moderncombat:AK47, w:c:insurgency:M4A1) I noticed this wiki is now using portable infoboxes for the weapon infobox, but not for others. Right now there are at least three styles of infoboxes, of which some look like they're just not finished. I would like to help designing them. ::[[:User:Ysbert|'ysbert']] �� �� 10:04, January 14, 2017 (UTC) :::I'll appreciate any and all help. Funny enough, I did a draft of the vehicle portable infobox template—Template:Infobox/Draft—which does look bloated. I'm comfortable with the layout of data, but not with style and theming. Nayhem (talk) 11:00, January 14, 2017 (UTC) :::: I see. I will take a look at the CSS as soon as I have some time - I'm pretty busy right now. I will keep you guys updated. Thanks for the positive response! [[:User:Ysbert|'ysbert']] �� �� 13:06, January 14, 2017 (UTC) :::: Hi, I made a start on the CSS. You can see the difference if you copy @import "/load.php?articles=User:Ysbert/wikia.css&only=styles&mode=articles"; and paste it into User:Nayhem/wikia.css. The changes are visible on any Portable Infobox, for example the vehicle infobox draft you linked. I will keep updating my CSS. :::: ::::[[:User:Ysbert|'ysbert']] �� �� 13:50, January 14, 2017 (UTC) Adminship Nomination Please accept or decline the nomination found here. -- 08:19, January 30, 2017 (UTC) :Congrats on becoming the first new admin in almost three years! Ive proceeded to make the changes. Enjoy the gold username and the Admin dashboard -- 05:55, February 10, 2017 (UTC) ::So shiny! Thanks for the upgrade. -- Nayhem (talk) 10:12, February 10, 2017 (UTC) Re: Gun Stats Okay, cool. Though, out of curiosity, what lines do I have to find to get damage values, damage drop off, first shot multiplier and spread? Just wondering. -- Aljohn Salceda 04:01, January 31, 2017 (UTC) : Dig around. Like I said, the relevant bits are split between the weapon and its ammo type, but it's all scattered among tons of less relevant stuff. You can pretty much ignore anything that isn't WeaponName.dice or BulletType.dice, though the U_* files may have some unlock information. You may have to ask the Symthic guys if they've written anything for finding the important stuff. Otherwise we might need to pioneer. — Nayhem (talk) 08:46, February 3, 2017 (UTC) Hey I saw you added the BF1 DLC Assignment red link to the assignments disambig. Do you know if theyre going to add that? If anything it would probably be BF1 DLC Codex Pages. -- 04:10, February 21, 2017 (UTC) :The weapons appear to be unlocked via assignment. Might be a bit hasty seeing as this is CTE, so I don't plan on adding the actual pages yet. I see no problem reverting the page until TSNP is released. — Nayhem (talk) 04:13, February 21, 2017 (UTC) :In that case we can just call the page Battlefield 1 Assignments as the base didnt have its own assignments. -- 04:27, February 21, 2017 (UTC) ::If you wish. I avoided that because the base game doesn't have assignments. — Nayhem (talk) 04:29, February 21, 2017 (UTC) Neogundam This guy is seriously not taking the hint. Several times he's added redundant information, speculation, and unecessarily removed content. He's not being very helpful to be honest. Someone needs to warn him or something... (Edit: Okay, so apparently this isn't the first time he's done something like this. He was banned on the Gundam Wiki for the same thing for two years. Just putting it out there.)— User:Aljohn Salceda Neogundam... Again Take a wild guess what he did. After he was given his final warning. - Aljohn Salceda (Talk) :Okay then. Of all the strange things this guy could be persistent about … — Nayhem (talk) 01:22, June 24, 2017 (UTC) Guns.PNG Hey Nayhem, I have a question: Where did you get the side views of the gun in PNG format? I need them for the new weapons and wanted to know how you guys did it. :Let me know when someone finds out. Doesn't appear to be BF Companion, but possibly taken from game files? -- Nayhem (talk) 02:55, September 8, 2017 (UTC) Edit Request Can you add the images to the BF1 Assignment page? I currently do not have time to do this task. Thanks. -- 19:31, September 11, 2017 (UTC) :I can add icons, but I still have no idea where people are getting the static images. -- Nayhem (talk) 03:08, September 12, 2017 (UTC) :We get them from the Battlefield Companion Website. Check it out -- 04:11, September 12, 2017 (UTC) :: I know about the icons, but what about the full color images? -- Nayhem (talk) 05:17, September 12, 2017 (UTC) ::Yep they come from the same place. Theyre on the right where the weapon stats are located. -- 06:08, September 12, 2017 (UTC) :::Something must be wrong on my end then. On both Loadout and Stats, it just shows me the icon versions, never the full color images. However, the BF4 companion shows me full colors. -- Nayhem (talk) 07:56, September 12, 2017 (UTC) :::Check the weapons tab where you view how many kills youve gotten with each weapon. Itll show the color image on the right with weapon stats. -- 09:30, September 12, 2017 (UTC) ::::I don't doubt you. Fairly certain they're not showing correctly for me. -- Nayhem (talk) 00:38, September 13, 2017 (UTC) ::::You are right. Its supposed to show color images, not icons. -- 03:25, September 13, 2017 (UTC) Discord Proposal. https://discord.gg/yrptjCK invite ofc. Me, Flux and Ramp are going to discuss the idea of using a Battlefield wikia discord server. Slopijoe (talk) 16:16, September 21, 2017 (UTC) Weapon pages and CTE Can you share the reason for putting "The weapon is currently available in the Community Test Environment for the Assault class" in M1912 page? Do you imply M1912 will be transferred to another class in final game or you want to point out its availability in CTE? Because first one seems to be unlikely since it never happened before and second one is confusing - CTE is not live the way the main game is - it works by schedule thus weapon is not available most of the time. It's okay to point out if it's in CTE, but I don't remember if CTE's version of weapon was of "1" class and in final version it was replaced to "2" class. Of course that statement is void if something like that happened, but I don't see the reason for nitpicking out the class used for weapon in CTE version. -Medlone (talk) 01:15, October 18, 2017 (UTC) : Something else that hasn't happened before is an extended pistol being an Assault main weapon, and gadgets have changed classes before. But I also see that all classes get either two variants or two weapons. In any case, it's there in CTE for those who want to try, and there is nothing inaccurate in the articles. — Nayhem (talk) 01:52, October 18, 2017 (UTC) Yo Hey Nayhem can you go about fixing the image problem with the new infoboxes you created? Images no longer fit the boxes and look atrocious. Additionally I noticed you deleted my infobox. -- 14:49, October 21, 2017 (UTC) : Can you point them out? And which infobox? — Nayhem (talk) 03:18, October 22, 2017 (UTC) ::Character, Weapon, etc infoboxes. Take a look at Henry Blackburn page as example. -- 03:36, October 22, 2017 (UTC) :::Removed rules for images except a max width of 300 px. Shift+F5 to refresh cache. The portable infobox system does seem to ignore inline size rules. |image = "… deleted my infobox" That will not happen again. Tmnt gundam *Isn't this guy the same tool who was, to put it bluntly, stupidly stubborn in his edits? And this is the sockpuppet account? He didn't learn a single thing, hasn't he? Because he's doing it again. Discord invite https://discord.gg/yrptjCK Namely its used to communicate more easier, Awy and flux (whos on leave due to his computer deciding to fry up) are in. - Slopijoe (talk) 09:27, December 14, 2017 (UTC) :Thanks for the invite, even if I hesitate to use it. I'm generally more easily reached through talk, and would likely agree with whatever's being discussed. — Nayhem (talk) 09:42, December 20, 2017 (UTC) Coastal Artillery I must inform you that just because you doesn't like something, doesn't mean it shoud be remowed. Especially when people are trying to make an good and useful article. Just so you know, it's this part from the fortress gun article. ___________________________________________________________________________________________________ The fortress gun returns in the Turning Tides dlc on the map Heligoland Bight. It can be found near the coast between the B flag and the mountain. It's bottom half is, as always, protect inside an bunker. Which is directly connected to an trench line around and above it. In direct contrast to this. The top half is not just threaten by airplanes and close-range infantry. No, this fortress gun also have to content with ships, boats and any soldier with the marksman skills of an stormtrooper. As well as artillery. ______________________________________________________________________________________ : I'm sorry if you're upset by the removal, but this is what admins do. Believe me, I've been in enough arguments like this, on both sides. I know you will at least appreciate my reasoning. : In your edit I saw three points: :* There's a Fortress Gun in Heligoland. :* It works pretty much like the other Fortress Guns. :* There's a pop culture reference to Star Wars. : The first point is covered by the "Appearances" section, though I admit its precise location could be better stated. The second point was already covered by the existing article: bulky gun on top, meaty gunner hidden in a room below. The third point doesn't quite belong in this wiki—no other articles make jokes like this, and even my own attempts at levity have been stricken from record. There also aren't many connections between this series and Star Wars (DICE development, some WWI/II guns that were used as a basis for SW weapons, the Totokia, etc.), and many of us here tend to be cautious in this regard. : In any case, please keep the content top-quality. It's pretty depressing watching additions from enthusiastic editors such as yourself get removed or rolled back just because of spelling errors, redundancy, or casual tone. I do try to incorporate removed content that I feel is relevant, even if it goes against some of the other admins or moderators. But this can all be avoided in the first place by sticking to facts, and choosing efficiency over excess. I look forward to more productive edits. — Nayhem (talk) 09:42, December 20, 2017 (UTC) vehicle pages. Ok, so... lets start off with this: 57mm Cannon 37mm Cannon 75mm Cannon 76mm Cannon Is redundent at best, it offers no real info and can be essentially put onto the main pages of the loadouts themselves or Main Page of the vehicle. Its the equivalent of adding 120mm guns for the T-90/M1 and Type 99 MBTs. My proposal: remove the vehicle cannons for the most part, they are extremely redundant at best and not needed.-- Slopijoe (talk) 06:36, January 3, 2018 (UTC) :Redundant with what? There are differences between the cannons, and save for the one-offs like the 75 and 76, I don't see what is saved by removing them. This could extend back to the 20, 25, and 30mm cannons as well, even if they are more widely used and span across games. In any case, put it to a vote. — Nayhem (talk) 07:50, January 3, 2018 (UTC) :: Its redundant in the sense that it can easily be said on the main page of said article how the gun performs or we put in the package page, Because a 3 line stub about 1 vehicle package that is mainly just its description from the game isn't necessary. The 20, 25 and 30mm all had different characteristic and were essentially modifications of the gun. What were doing is essentially > main vehicle > package > gun and a small description of the gun that would look better in the main article. Also how rarely do the guns performance change? The A7V, Landship, St. Chamond, Armored Truck all carry the same caliber on every version. :: In my L-Class Destroyer re-write, the point/need of a page on the 4-inch gun is essentially null when its easier to just type it out in the article about the vehicle. -- Slopijoe (talk) 08:30, January 3, 2018 (UTC) ::: I get your point about needing so many clicks from a page to a specific weapon, though the Specs navbox does well enough linking individual packages and specs. There is still a matter of how detailed stats should be, and which stats should be reflected on which page. I still think the weapon pages can get into more specific details that would be tiresome on the vehicle or package pages. Perhaps the packages should be merged into the vehicles? ::: While partly wrong about the calibers, there's a more basic issue of the different ammo types doing roughly similar things between calibers. Perhaps each ammo type can get its own page? Or maybe we need a more general page about ammo types and game-specific pages for finer details? — Nayhem (talk) 04:19, January 5, 2018 (UTC) :::: Awy (he's deployed in Qatar, I can get him to reply to me on Discord but it takes a day or two, since I can get messages across to him easier and makes communication a lot easier) essentially nulled me by saying the guns will stay. Also, I meant The A7V, Landship, St. Chamond, Armored Truck all carry the same caliber on every package, only differing in shell type at most. :::: But concerning packages, this is a YMMV thinking about it, for example: the difference between the Torpedo Boat Destroyer and Minelayer is that you trade that extra seat for the ability to lay mines, this can be summarized in a short paragraph at best. While things such as the Artillery trucks AA package and 76mm gun package are far different. In my experiment for BF1 re-writing vehicles based on experience from the L-class re-write, I had 2 suggestions: ::::1. Write the whole thing out including guns, Packages and such. Essentially write the whole article out while going into full depth on the guns, packages ect. However this would lead to large clutter in some cases. . Copy and paste the guns and packages to the other page if need. ::::2. Write the main characteristics of the vehicle itself, IE weaknesses and handling, with the guns going into somewhat depth (more complicated stats are to be on the main gun article itself (IE the 57mm for the landships), and packaging being a summary of say... paragraph long with a main article template linking them, with the main article going into deeper depth. This makes navigating for a certain weapon easier at the cost of a lot of links. It also makes say I want info on the Tank hunter landship but I don't have to scroll through 1-2 blobs of text. Essentially structured as Landship>Packages>Guns/perks. ::::Lastly, concerning ammo type: this prob needs more explanation and comparing HE vs AP vs W/E ammo type they carry. ::::--Slopijoe (talk) 11:08, January 5, 2018 (UTC) :::::Cutting down from three stages back to two is a good idea. I think it might work better for packages to merge or subpage into vehicles since there isn't any significant sharing between them. I don't expect we'll see these vehicles again, so we can probably afford some bloat if it means we're still thorough. :::::Whose idea was it to start package pages in the first place? I only remember continuing them for later vehicles. — Nayhem (talk) 04:47, January 6, 2018 (UTC) Awy (according to most of the pages history). The guns were made by someone else. I will make a rough draft on a vehicle (Putilov-Garford or some other vehicle) and it will be completed soon. -- Slopijoe (talk) 06:28, January 7, 2018 (UTC) :I'm reminded now that the package pages give some good historical context, but I'm still interested in how these may be condensed. — Nayhem (talk) 08:27, January 9, 2018 (UTC) Done Assault Truck page is overhauled in a sense + a modified Assault Truck/Armored Assault Package with a redirect towards the page. Also, is there a website to tell velocity and health? -- 21:32, January 20, 2018 (UTC) : A fine start! : Symthic has a link to the gamefiles (http://bfdata.juhala.io/). I don't recall how easy or complex it is to gather a velocity value (could be as simple as some sort of MaxVelocity value), but health has become difficult to judge with the modular damage system. Each part has its own health, including some parts that seem to "transfer" their damage to a more general part (something like an openable door that counts as part of the side of the vehicle). There is also a network of dependencies that has to be mapped in order to figure out the sum. Hopefully, someone may have already done the work if you check the forums. : A problem I've run into is figuring out where weapon damage multipliers are stored, which would give insight into how weapons do damage to vehicles. I noticed it when looking up the Crossbow Launcher—HE supposedly does less than frag, but obviously does more damage to vehicles. — Nayhem (talk) 06:09, January 22, 2018 (UTC) Re: Promoted! Thanks, man! - --FluoxetinePatch (talk) 13:46, July 12, 2018 (UTC) Show/Hide Seems like we have work to do. Navboxes are a major habit around here. — Nayhem (talk) 00:42, October 2, 2018 (UTC) Re:CSS Well, not personal CSS. I've been really struggling with CSS for the Counter-Strike wiki which I administrate. I've been struggling with the CSS for the new infoboxes (and lots of other stuff) and I want some suggestions as to what I can do. --Wuzh (talk) 07:38, November 20, 2018 (UTC) 2142 Field Upgrades Hey Nayhem, do you know how Field Upgrades work in 2142. Ive formatted them in tables but it seems to me only the Player Upgrades are the real Field upgrades while the rest are simply gadget upgrades. Can you confirm? --''awyman13https://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/joeplayground/images/e/e5/FandomStaff.png ('Talk/ )''' 01:31, May 27, 2019 (UTC) : Field Upgrades in 2142 are basically temporary unlocks. There are ten paths of unlocks—two for each class, one for player abilities, and one for squad leader gadgets—each path goes from the bottom up. Only the next item in each path is available as a field upgrade. For instance, a player with the unlocked can receive the Advanced Medic Hub as a field upgrade, but not the . The unlocks remain as long as the player stays on the server, and only those ten are available, even if the player earns an actual unlock. So the player can eventually unlock the Advanced Medic Hub (even after choosing it as a field upgrade) and Smoke Grenade, but cannot field upgrade to the Voss L-AR until their next server session. : It's not like later games where the player only receives minor bonuses. The kits are actually upgraded with new gadgets, weapons, and other improvements. Early players can try out unlocks they haven't unlocked yet. : It would make more sense to group the upgrades by paths (e.g. APM to DysTek Hi-Scope x4 to Gruber-5 Stabilizer to Zeller-H Advanced Sniper Rifle) than by type. Each of the class paths generally goes Gadget upgrade or [[NetBat Helmet] upgrade, Gadget (or Stabilizer attachment), Primary Weapon].— Nayhem (talk) 08:44, May 27, 2019 (UTC) Adobe / Photoshop Wiki Hi Nayhem, I saw an ancient post of yours requesting to assist with the Photoshop Wiki, which appears to have flatlined. I'm currently in the process of rebuilding the Adobe Wiki, and would like to know if you'd be interested in helping to rebuild and admin it. —Pippinitis (talk) 19:48, November 12, 2019 (UTC) :Sounds interesting! I might not be able to contribute as readily as back then, but I'm happy to help out where able. — Nayhem (talk) 06:39, November 13, 2019 (UTC) ::Ok thanks, let me know whenever you think you'd need admin rights. Here's the site's table of contents. —Pippinitis (talk) 17:26, November 18, 2019 (UTC) Strange rouge transmission glitch I noticed a while back that on (this has only been tested on the PS3 version of Battlefield 4, by me, so i don't know if this affects all platforms, and i've only noticed this on Conquest) Rouge Transmission, once i reach the top of the huge towers that hold up the cables (both by climbing the ladders and by walking up the cables), for some very strange reason, my soldier automatically starts randomly calling out spotting commands, and the noise for spotting an enemy is heard, yet my soldier does not point, nobody is actually spotted and even when i look on the minimap, i don't actually spot anybody. I've noticed this happening to my teammates as well. I'm pretty sure this is a glitch or a bug that was never noticed by DICE. I mention all this becuase i want to put this in the trivia section of that map. Should i, or should i leave that out? Like i said, i've only ever tested this on the PS3 version (it's the only version i own anyways), so if you could test this as well, please feel free to. Thanks! ExodusBF4 (talk) 02:57, January 11, 2020 (UTC)ExodusBF4 : Would help to get more confirmation, especially clips from another player posted online (YouTube, SHAREFactory, etc.). Might help to post on the map page's comment section. Were you actively doing anything to trigger the voice lines, or were they coming out automatically? If I do manage to find the same glitch, I'll let you know. :I'm not sure this is limited to that particular map. I have a clip from BFV Wake Island where I'm riding in a tank gunner seat, yelling out "giving ammo" lines at everyone I'm shooting. — Nayhem (talk) 06:51, January 11, 2020 (UTC) I'm pretty sure no footage of this glitch exists, let alone other people talking about it. Yes, it may be unique to me and me alone, but it's just such an odd glitch. Random enemy spotted callouts coming from my soldier, yet nobody is actually spotted and it's only active when i'm up on big ball thing or the towers holding it up. ExodusBF4 (talk) 09:20, January 11, 2020 (UTC)ExodusBF4 Edit: No, i'm not doing anything actively trigger the callouts, my soldier just will randomly yell "enemy sniper spotted" over and over every few seconds. I've noticed that if a teammate of mine is close by, their soldier will also start yelling out enemy spotted lines. ExodusBF4 (talk) 09:22, January 11, 2020 (UTC)ExodusBF4